News (Media Awareness Project) - Ireland: New Bill 'Pathetic Version' Of Zero Tolerance |
| Title: | Ireland: New Bill 'Pathetic Version' Of Zero Tolerance |
| Published On: | 1997-11-20 |
| Source: | Irish Times |
| Fetched On: | 2008-09-07 19:32:50 |
By Maol Muire Tynan, Political Reporter
The 1997 Criminal Justice Bill has been roundly condemned as "a pathetic
version" of the zero tolerance policy advocated by the Minister for
Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, while in Opposition.
Describing the Bill as "a damp squib and a flawed one at that", the Fine
Gael justice spokesman, Mr Jim Higgins, said mandatory minimum sentencing
based on the value of drugs possessed was "a very dangerous principle".
Mandatory sentencing was contrary to the proper separation of functions
between the courts and the Oireachtas, he added.
Questioning how an arbitrary figure of £10,000 could be used "as a legal
trigger" to bring an alleged drug trafficker within the scope of the Bill,
Mr Higgins inquired as to how an accused would know the value of drugs,
since this was an unlawful market with no prices published.
He also described as "a bad principle" the exclusion of publication of
court proceedings since "justice should be done in public in accordance
with Article 34.2 of the Irish Constitution".
He was "concerned" that the issues of inference being drawn from refusal to
answer questions or give bodily samples had not been dealt with in the
Bill. If the legislation was to be truly comprehensive, these issues should
have been included.
Ms Liz McManus, Democratic Left justice spokeswoman, said she would be
tabling amendments to the Bill when it came before the House. The
publication of the Bill demonstrated that the Minister's pronouncements on
zero tolerance were little more than "preelection macho posturing".
"With the exception of the provisions relating to mandatory sentencing for
certain drug offences, the Bill consists largely of improvements in
administrative procedures in the courts which will be generally
noncontroversial. Indeed, many of these were under consideration by the
previous government," she said.
Also expressing serious reservations about the principle of mandatory
sentences, Ms McManus said the proposals took away virtually every element
of discretion from a judge hearing a case.
The 1997 Criminal Justice Bill has been roundly condemned as "a pathetic
version" of the zero tolerance policy advocated by the Minister for
Justice, Mr O'Donoghue, while in Opposition.
Describing the Bill as "a damp squib and a flawed one at that", the Fine
Gael justice spokesman, Mr Jim Higgins, said mandatory minimum sentencing
based on the value of drugs possessed was "a very dangerous principle".
Mandatory sentencing was contrary to the proper separation of functions
between the courts and the Oireachtas, he added.
Questioning how an arbitrary figure of £10,000 could be used "as a legal
trigger" to bring an alleged drug trafficker within the scope of the Bill,
Mr Higgins inquired as to how an accused would know the value of drugs,
since this was an unlawful market with no prices published.
He also described as "a bad principle" the exclusion of publication of
court proceedings since "justice should be done in public in accordance
with Article 34.2 of the Irish Constitution".
He was "concerned" that the issues of inference being drawn from refusal to
answer questions or give bodily samples had not been dealt with in the
Bill. If the legislation was to be truly comprehensive, these issues should
have been included.
Ms Liz McManus, Democratic Left justice spokeswoman, said she would be
tabling amendments to the Bill when it came before the House. The
publication of the Bill demonstrated that the Minister's pronouncements on
zero tolerance were little more than "preelection macho posturing".
"With the exception of the provisions relating to mandatory sentencing for
certain drug offences, the Bill consists largely of improvements in
administrative procedures in the courts which will be generally
noncontroversial. Indeed, many of these were under consideration by the
previous government," she said.
Also expressing serious reservations about the principle of mandatory
sentences, Ms McManus said the proposals took away virtually every element
of discretion from a judge hearing a case.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...
